Mulligan v. Dick & Son [1903] ScotLR 41_77 (19 November 1903)

Mulligan v. Dick & Son [1903] ScotLR 41_77 (19 November 1903)

A workman who claims and receives damages from a third party not his employer, even by settlement and with a 'without prejudice' reservation, is barred by section 6 of the Workmen's Compensation Act 1897 from subsequently claiming compensation from his employer for the same injury.

Citation
[1903] ScotLR 41_77
Parties
Appellant: Andrew Mulligan; Respondent: John Dick & Son
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
19 November 1903
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Arbitration Under Workmen's Compensation Act 1897 / Inner House, First Division, Court of Session
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Workmen's Compensation, Election of Remedies, Third Party Liability, Settlement and Discharge
Labour Law Tort Law Statutory Compensation Workmen's Compensation Election of Remedies Third Party Liability Settlement and Discharge

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Andrew Mulligan

Appellant

John Dick & Son

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Arbitration Under Workmen's Compensation Act 1897 / Inner House, First Division, Court of Session

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a workman who has settled a claim for damages against a third party not his employer, 'without prejudice' to his statutory claim, is barred from subsequently claiming compensation from his employer under the Workmen's Compensation Act 1897, section 6.

Ratio Decidendi

A workman who claims and receives damages from a third party not his employer, even by settlement and with a 'without prejudice' reservation, is barred by section 6 of the Workmen's Compensation Act 1897 from subsequently claiming compensation from his employer for the same injury.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The question of law is answered in the affirmative: the appellant is barred from claiming compensation from his employer after settling with the third party.
  • Appeal refused.